Latest news with #GautengDivision
IOL News
22-05-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
Gauteng high courts face crisis: Judicial Service Commission announces vacancies
The Gauteng division of the high court, Johannesburg and Pretoria, which are some of the busiest courts in the country, could see more judges appointed to this division later in the year. Image: Jacques Naude / Independent Newspapers While the Gauteng Division of the High Court (Pretoria and Johannesburg) is struggling to cope with the heavy workload, mainly due to too much work and too few judges, there may be light at the end of the tunnel as the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is looking to fill eight vacancies in this division. The JSC has called for nominations to fill these vacancies, as well as for candidates to apply for two vacancies in the Constitutional Court. It will also accept nominations of candidates to fill one vacancy in the Supreme Court of Appeal, one in the Land Court, as well as for three vacancies in the Johannesburg Labour Court. Two vacancies are open in the Mpumalanga division, while there is one vacancy open in the Free State and Limpopo divisions. The KwaZulu-Natal division has five vacancies available. Interviews of the shortlisted candidates are due to take place from October 6 to October 17. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ A Pretoria law firm, which has turned to the Constitutional Court for direct access in an urgent bid to overturn a directive introducing mandatory mediation in the Gauteng Division of the High Court, has, meanwhile, received the green light from the apex court that it will hear the matter. Since last month, the Johannesburg and Pretoria high courts no longer allocate trial dates for civil cases (cases where evidence is being led, such as damages claims). Litigants in these cases who want a judge to determine their issues must first prove that they have tried to resolve their issues via mediation. A trial date will be allocated only if mediation does not resolve the issues, and they can prove via a certificate that they did try it. The Office of the Chief Justice earlier explained that there are no alternatives as the Gauteng divisions cannot cope with the heavy workload. Gert Nel Inc Attorneys, through its director Gert Nel, however, questioned whether this move for mandatory mediation is constitutionally sound. Nel wants the Constitutional Court to look into whether there are constitutional limits on judicial power. He will argue that the directive amounts to the 'erosion of litigants' rights through unlawful judicial overreach'.
Daily Maverick
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
Two Oceans Marathon chairperson squares off with blogger over ‘defamatory' articles
Two Oceans Marathon chairperson Toni Cavanagh has approached the high court on an urgent basis over what she alleges are defamatory and malicious articles written by blogger Stuart Mann. In the aftermath of last month's Two Oceans Marathon, in which the race organisers drew widespread criticism over multiple issues, the chairperson of the marathon, Toni Cavanagh, is dragging one of her loudest critics to court. Cavanagh has approached the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Johannesburg on an urgent basis. She wants popular running blogger Stuart Mann to rescind claims that he has made on his platform over the last couple of months. In her affidavit, she said the articles written by Mann were defamatory and contained half-truths to suit a specific narrative, thus disrupting the operations of the Two Oceans Marathon board. She said her health had suffered since Mann zeroed in on her. On his blog, The Running Mann, Mann wrote articles in which he alleged that Cavanagh (who was elected as Two Oceans chairperson in October 2024) did not attain the position in an honest manner. Mann's allegations included the Two Oceans chairperson lying about her running credentials, as well as embellishing her professional CV. In one of his articles, Mann labelled this year's Two Oceans 'the worst organised' edition of the marathon. As a direct consequence of accepting more runners than were permitted for the 2025 event, the Two Oceans organisers did not have enough medals to distribute after the race. Participants also bemoaned the limited number of water tables along the route. Some runners complained of the distance between the tables, which they said were often overcrowded. Mann also highlighted these issues on his platform, with Cavanagh acknowledging to Daily Maverick that she and her colleagues could have done a better job. Reputational damage Nevertheless, she said the issues had been blown out of proportion. In her affidavit, she contended that Mann fuelled this furore with his publications. 'This application arises from a series of allegedly defamatory publications authored by the respondent, Stuart Mann, a blogger operating under the alias 'The Running Mann', which the applicants contend constitute a sustained campaign of reputational harm, harassment and character assassination,' she said. 'The publications falsely impugn the first applicant's personal and professional integrity, question the legitimacy of her leadership and cast aspersions on the governance and ethical standing of the Two Oceans Marathon. 'The applicants submit that the publications violate constitutional rights to dignity and psychological integrity, have caused measurable reputational and medical harm and jeopardise the credibility and sponsorship viability of the Two Oceans.' Cavanagh is asking the court to force Mann to retract and delete his article, and to issue a public apology in the form of a media statement. The Two Oceans boss also wants Mann to stop writing about her and has asked for an interdict to be granted to this end. Not backing down Mann, though, is not backing down and argued that he did not set out to humiliate Cavanagh, but aimed to use his powerful platform to hold Cavanagh and her colleagues accountable for their shortcomings. In his affidavit, Mann highlighted the injustices within the running community that he has exposed over the years. This includes him breaking the story of Steven Swarts earlier this year. Swarts was the Athletics Free State president despite being a convicted sex offender serving a suspended sentence. Mann's writing led to Swarts being removed from his post by Athletics South Africa. Mann said he had nothing to gain by aimlessly picking on Cavanagh, but wished to preserve the prestige of the Two Oceans Marathon and extend its lifespan. 'I deny that any statements or comments in the articles were defamatory, but are indeed truthful and in the public interest. [They] represent fair comment and criticism,' he said. 'Any attempt by the first applicant to paint me as a sexist is completely unfounded and I submit (with utmost respect) done in an effort to gain sympathy from the court.' Mann also said whatever criticism Cavanagh and her colleagues had been subjected to was by virtue of their own incompetence. He used the permit breach saga, which cost the Two Oceans Marathon its sponsorship from the City of Cape Town, as an example. 'I am not sure how I can be blamed for this. The City of Cape Town has, on its own accord and completely separate to any of my articles, shown distrust in the second applicant's leadership as a result of the permit scandal,' Mann said of Cavanagh. The court case will be heard on Tuesday, 13 May. DM
Daily Maverick
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
High court hears DA's case against employment equity amendment in critical examination of transformation
The DA's case against Labour Minister Nomakhosazana Meth and the Employment Equity Amendment Act is under way in the Gauteng Division of the High Court, with the DA opening the door for the entire bill to be declared invalid. 'Leave good enough alone.' This was the Democratic Alliance's (DA) argument in the Gauteng Division of the High Court on Tuesday, 6 May 2025, as the party challenged the constitutionality of the new draft employment equity targets proposed in the recently gazetted Employment Equity Amendment Act. The courtroom was filled with members of the public, including prominent individuals like DA MP Willie Aucamp and Cosatu Secretary-General Solly Phetoe. The DA's legal representative, Ismail Jamie, told the court that the previous iteration of the Employment Equity Act struck an appropriate balance between fostering transformation and protecting the rights of undesignated groups in that it was flexible, prohibited quotas, and gave employers the power to set their own targets based on their specific circumstances. Jamie argued that the amended act violated Section 9 of the Constitution because it 'replaces a nuanced, flexible system with one that is blunt and rigid'. In April, the Department of Employment and Labour gazetted the amendment act, which introduced five-year numerical targets for the top four occupational levels (junior, middle, senior and top management) across 18 sectors, ranging from finance to manufacturing. 'Rights violated' While the party's main argument was that Section 15a of the amended act violated the rights of coloureds, Indians and white people, another key argument was that the draft law was tagged incorrectly, therefore making it invalid. Jamie argued that the amendment bill was passed under Section 75 (which excluded provinces) of the Constitution instead of Section 76 (which governs legislation on a national level). Section 76 governs how bills affecting provinces must be passed, and its focus was to ensure that provincial interests were considered. The party's representative maintained that if the court found that Section 15A of the amended act was indeed invalid because it had been tagged incorrectly, then a natural consequence of the finding would be that the entire amended act be deemed invalid on a technicality. The DA also claims that: Section 15A violates Section 9 of the Constitution by enabling discrimination based on race. The minister's discretion under Section 15a lacks clear legal standards, contravening the Dawood principle of administrative law. The implementation of demographic targets disproportionately prejudices coloured and Indian communities in certain provinces, particularly the Western Cape and KwaZulu-Natal. Exemptions for small businesses and the government's settlement in the Solidarity case suggest an acknowledgement of the potential economic harm of the quotas. Drama unfolds While the proceedings were relatively calm, they were unceremoniously interrupted by two unidentified individuals, who said that they were aggrieved parties who deserved to submit to the court. In a dramatic turn, the men told the judge that they would consider the case a mistrial if the judge refused to hear them, as Parliament had ignored their interests when drafting a law that worked against their interests. The judge refused to hear them and summarily dismissed the pair. The case is ongoing with the Department of Employment and Labour's representatives presenting the State's argument. DM
IOL News
28-04-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
Pretoria law firm challenges mandatory mediation directive in Constitutional Court
Gert Nel, the head of a law firm that specialises in Road Accident Fund matters, has expressed his concerns over proposed plans regarding mandatory mediation for civil trials. He is now challenging the directive in the Constitutional Court. Image: File A Pretoria law firm has turned to the Constitutional Court for direct access to the highest court in the country in an urgent bid to overturn a directive introducing mandatory mediation in the Gauteng Division of the High Court. Since last week, the Johannesburg and Pretoria high courts no longer allocate trial dates for civil cases (cases where evidence is being led, such as damages claims). Litigants, who in these cases want a judge to determine their issues, must first prove that they have tried to resolve their issues via mediation. A trial date will be allocated only if mediation does not resolve the issues, and they can prove via a certificate that they did try it. Gauteng Judge President Dunstan Mlambo in March issued a draft directive and called for objections from the public, lawyers, and interested parties. While many vehemently opposed the directives, it came into force last week. The Office of the Chief Justice explained that there are no alternatives as the Gauteng Divisions simply cannot cope with the heavy workload. Judge Mlambo also commented in his directive that the bulk of these cases are, in any event, settled on the day of the trial. Thus, the mediation route is the practical solution so that judges can be freed to adjudicate over other matters. Gert Nel Inc Attorneys, through its director Gert Nel, questioned whether this move for mandatory mediation is constitutionally sound. In an affidavit accompanying his urgent application, Nel said there are constitutional limits on judicial power and the 'erosion of litigants' rights through unlawful judicial overreach'. According to Nel, litigants, who include his clients, face tangible prejudice as they are now refused any court dates unless they can prove mediation in their matters was unsuccessful. 'Their cases have been stalled and even existing trial dates are in jeopardy.' Nel said even before the draft directive was made final, it was treated as being final. He said although the bar on allocating trial dates without first going the mediation route, the fundamental basis of this application is the uncertainty regarding the power of a head of court to issue a directive that purports to overrule legislation. According to Nel, the head of the court - Judge President Mlambo in this case - lacks the power under the Constitution and the Superior Courts Act to mandate compulsory mediation for all civil trials in the Gauteng division. He asked the Constitutional Court to thus declare the directive to be constitutionally invalid. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕
IOL News
23-04-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
Gauteng High Court mandates mediation for civil trials
Gauteng Judge President Dunstan Mlambo has issued a final directive that from this week onwards, no civil trial dates will be issued in this division, without first attempting the mediation route Image: File It is all systems go from this week at the Gauteng Division of the High Court as no new civil trial dates will be issued to litigants unless they have proved that they have first tried to resolve their issues via mediation. Judge President Dunstan Mlambo has issued a final directive on the implementation of mandatory mediation in this division for all civil trial matters, which has now come into effect. It has been issued following a wide consultative process by the division with law bodies, practitioners, and mediation organisations. The Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) said it is aimed at alleviating the backlogs and constraints that currently plague the division's civil trial roll. A draft directive was earlier circulated by Judge Mlambo for inputs and comments from stakeholders. While some were against it, the OCJ said this was the best route to follow to ensure justice for all. 'The overarching rationale for the directive is to provide an effective and expeditious litigation platform that guarantees access to justice service, within the contemplation of the Constitution. As of February 2025, the Division's Civil Trial roll has trial dates issued as far ahead as 2031,' the OCJ said. It stressed that this situation is clearly untenable and infringes on the right to access to courts, and thus the leadership has decided to adopt drastic measures to address this situation. 'The directive is borne out of the overwhelming insistence for trial dates by plaintiffs' legal representatives for matters that have no triable issues and, as a result, have no need for adjudication by a judge,' it explained. According to the OCJ, an overwhelming majority of matters on the trial roll of the Gauteng Divisions are settled on the trial day. It said less than 10% of matters on the trial roll of the division require a judge to resolve them through adjudication. A sample of matters enrolled in both Courts in the period March 10 to 28 this year showed that out of the 59 matters before the Johannesburg High Court, only two presented a triable issue requiring a judge. In 32 matters, draft orders were granted in 21 matters, and 11 were settled. These matters had no triable issues; hence these outcomes, the OCJ said. In Pretoria, over the same period, 339 were on the trial roll. Only 11 matters presented with triable issues requiring judicial attention. In 174 matters, draft orders were granted, and nine matters were settled. "The statistical outcomes from these weeks illustrate in no uncertain terms that the civil trial roll is inundated with matters that have no triable issues and, as such, do not require a judge to resolve them,' the OCJ said. The office is confident that compulsory mediation is the route to go, as this will also expedite litigation, instead of people waiting for years to have their issues resolved. While the OCJ said the shortage of judges and the increases in cases are the major reasons for the backlogs in this division, increasing the judicial capacity on its own will not resolve the problem caused by the enrolment of matters that present no triable issues. Judge Mlambo, meanwhile, added that more than 85% of trial matters that have waited years to be on the trial roll always settle upon the arrival of the trial date without judicial intervention. It was made clear by the OCJ that from this week, no trial dates will be issued unless the request is accompanied by a mediator's report. [email protected]
